E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCurrently 21 states and Washington, D.C., use automated cameras at traffic intersections to catch violations such as running through red lights and stopping over white lines. While the cameras bring in thousands of extra dollars, drivers and some government officials argue they are inaccurate and rip people off. NBC's Tom Costello reports.
Drivers dread it -- that flash as they try to speed through a yellow traffic light. It’s a red light camera, and a signal that a ticket is on the way.
A rarity 15 years ago, red light cameras have become ubiquitous in many U.S. cities. Communities in 24 states and Washington, D.C., now use the cameras to try to decrease illegal -- and sometimes deadly -- traffic violations. Supporters say it’s worked.
"In the last five years we went from 54 traffic fatalities to 19,” said Cathy Lanier, police chief in Washington, D.C., which began using the cameras in 1999. “I mean, that's dramatic!”
Red light cameras are one piece of a growing network of automated traffic enforcement. Cameras now monitor speed, bus and high-occupancy-vehicle lanes and intersections with stop signs. Proponents like Lanier say they help to deter accidents, nab violators and allow states and municipalities to keep an eye on the roads for less.
But critics of red light programs worry about the Big Brother aspect of using cameras instead of cops. Many also say cameras, which are generally run by private companies, have spread not because they make streets safer, but because they mean profit for cities and companies.
“What the issue really comes down to is these companies are ripping people off by hundreds of millions of dollars, in the name of caring about our safety and our health and our kids,” said New Jersey Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon, who has introduced anti-red light camera legislation to the state Legislature.
Recent news stories have fueled opposition. In Chicago, an alleged pay-to-play scandal led the mayor to ban one company from bidding for future contracts. Millions were spent on pro-camera lobbying in Florida and other states. In Iowa, doubts about the constitutionality of using cameras as traffic enforcers led a state senator to introduce a bill to ban red-light cameras – a move already taken by at least nine other states.
What does science say?
Red light violations were associated with some 700 deaths and nearly 90,000 injuries in 2009, according to a study based on data reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatalities and injuries have decreased in recent years, the study shows.
Researchers, however, are divided on how much red light cameras increase safety.
Charlie Neibergall / AP file
Traffic passes a red light camera at an intersection in Clive, Iowa.
In 2011, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research group funded by the insurance industry, released a study that found red light cameras decreased fatal accidents by an estimated 24 percent in large cities that use them.
But a 2005 Federal Highway Administration study painted a more nuanced picture. Data from seven jurisdictions showed a decrease in front-into-side crashes at intersections with cameras. But it also showed an increase in rear-end crashes. The researchers said that apparently was the result of drivers hitting the brakes to avoid a ticket. Overall, however, the research showed the cameras saved money by both decreasing the most serious accidents, and generating revenue.
However, the FHA says that red light cameras shouldn’t be a knee-jerk traffic enforcement option. The agency issued a number of recommendations regarding the implementation of red light cameras, saying cameras should be considered only after engineering solutions have failed in problem intersections. Among the possible solutions, it says: Give drivers more cushion. Increasing yellow time by one second, it found, can result in a 40 percent decrease in crashes in stoplight-controlled intersections.
“It all hinges on proper yellow light time,” said John Bowman, communications director of the National Motorists Association, a drivers advocacy group. “If yellow lights are set properly, based on established traffic engineering, red light cameras are unnecessary because you almost automatically have low numbers of violations and low numbers of accidents. If you shorten those yellow light times beyond bare minimums, that’s when you start to generate more accidents and more violations.”
Problematic cameras
A yellow light in Cary, N.C., had Howard Bond seeing red.
Last year Bond’s son was issued two different tickets for turning left on a red light at an intersection. But when Bond watched videotape of the alleged traffic offenses, he saw that in both instances his son had legally turned left on a flashing yellow light. The town had recently switched to a flashing yellow at the intersection, but Redflex, the private company running the cameras, kept treating it as a red, Bond said.
Each time, Bond, who lives in nearby Chatham County, went to the office that issued the tickets to complain. Each time, he said, his tickets were dismissed but the larger issue was ignored.
"I just basically stood there and said, ‘No sir, you’re going to look at the video,’” Bond told NBC News. But law enforcement officials told him he would have to attend a hearing to contest it.
"I said 'We’re not going through all that,'” Bond said. “He started hee-hawing around. Then he looked at the video and said, ‘This is wrong.’"
After a local television news station approached town officials with Bond’s tickets, details emerged about tens of other tickets wrongfully issued in Cary by faulty red light cameras last year. A review of its red light cameras found that cameras in one intersection had generated at least 31 false violations, many of which led to $50 tickets.
Town officials told the Raleigh News and Observer that Redflex had failed to report the error to the town.
But Jody Ryan, spokesperson for Redflex, said the company took action as soon as it discovered the wrongful tickets.
“In this situation, changes were made by the Town of Cary to the traffic light phases without Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. knowledge,” Ryan said. “Because we were unaware of these changes, our systems triggered a set of false positives. Once we were notified of the issue Redflex either dismissed or refunded all the affected citations on behalf of the Town of Cary.”
While major cities can make millions off red light cameras, in some contracts red light camera companies keep the majority of funds paid by violators. Redflex’s contract with Cary, for instance, allowed the company to keep 88 percent of the money generated by red-light camera tickets in Cary. Between April 2004 and July 2012, ticketed drivers paid $5.7 million to the company, and $646,000 to the Wake County Public School System, which received the city’s proceeds.
The controversy led town officials to abandon its red-light camera program altogether.
Cary is one of a number of communities, including large cities such as Houston, that have recently abandoned their camera programs amid opposition from residents.
Dollars and cents
About 700 municipalities in the country have cameras. One of the most prominent companies, Redflex, had about 2,000 cameras in operation around the nation in 2011, bringing in over $92 million in revenue, according to its annual report. American Traffic Solutions, another big player in the industry, reports more than 3,000 road safety systems installed in the U.S. and Canada, which include red light cameras.
Red light cameras can also pull in big revenues for cities. An investigation by NBC 4 in Washington, D.C., found the Capitol region drivers received tickets with at least $18 million dollars in fines in one year attributable to the cameras. NBC 5 in Dallas found a single camera in Arlington, Texas, generated $2.5 million over four years.
NBCDFW.com: Red light cameras make millions
Communities continue to adopt the technology. In 2011, East Cleveland residents voted to keep red light cameras. Last year, New Jersey’s Pohatcong Township voted to extend its contract with Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions.
“The bottom line is that those who oppose cameras are the minority,” said Charles Territo, spokesperson for American Traffic Solutions. He added that American Traffic Solutions doesn’t issue tickets: a police officer reviews each image before issuing a violation. According to ATS, about 50 percent of traffic “events” each year are rejected before a violation is issued.
“The majority of voters around the country know the dangers of red light running,” Territo said. “Nobody likes to get a ticket, but cameras are used in a number of places around the country and the world. They’re used to help police officers do their job.”
But cameras have faced increasing opposition from drivers who object to the automated systems for many reasons, including the inability to confront their accuser in court. Facing pressure from constituents, local and state politicians in Iowa, Florida, New Jersey and other states have recently introduced measures to change or end the camera programs.
Other controversies have raised questions about red light cameras. Problems with short yellow lights, which may increase the number of tickets issued, have surfaced in cities from California to Tennessee. Judges in Baltimore have castigated the city and thrown out tickets after finding the city had shortened yellow lights below recommended limits. Last summer, the New Jersey Transportation Department ordered 21 red light programs suspended after finding yellow-light timing issues. Meanwhile, camera companies have sued, or threatened to sue, cities who back out of contracts. And they’ve been investigated for possible pay-to-play schemes with local governments.
“They’re very aggressive in terms of lobbying for favorable legislation or favorable court cases,” said Bowman of the National Motorists Association. “It’s big business, and there’s a lot of money at stake.”
Last October, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel barred Redflex from re-bidding on the city’s red-light camera contract after a Chicago Tribune investigation found that Redflex company executives and lobbyists had paid for hotel rooms and spent thousands on entertainment for the city official overseeing the red light program.
Chicago’s red light cameras raised big revenues for the city. Redflex has operated a red-light program in the city since 2003, generating about $300 million in fines for the city and $97 million in revenue for itself. Redflex. Residents in the city have long complained about discrepancies between yellow light times in the city and its suburbs.
“We authorized an internal investigation and, though the inquiry is not complete, have learned that some Redflex employees did not meet our own code of conduct and the standards that the people of the City of Chicago deserve,” said Ryan, Redflex spokesperson, of the Chicago case. “We will take corrective action and make additional information public.”
Automated traffic enforcement companies spend millions persuading local and state lawmakers to expand programs, using lobbyists, municipal partners and nonprofits to advance the cause. After spending $1.5 million lobbying Florida lawmakers over four years, American Traffic Solutions became the main-red light camera supplier in the state, winning contracts in more than 65 cities.
Territo, the spokesperson for American Traffic Solutions, defended efforts to expand red light camera programs, which he emphasized are above all about safety. “Just as opponents of red-light safety cameras fund efforts to remove cameras, we expend resources on efforts to defend them,” he said.
Recognizing growing opposition to red light enforcement technologies, companies are looking to new markets. Both Redflex and American Traffic Solutions have active speed cameras in various markets, though 12 states have banned the technology. Both companies have also started programs to enforce rules prohibiting drivers from going around stopped school buses.
Redflex recently became the nation’s largest provider of school bus arm cameras, which catch drivers who speed past the stop signs that swing out from the side of school buses. The company has launched 10 pilot programs in six states.
More from Open Channel:
- Suburban Chicago cops allowed to work 'half drunk,' investigation shows
- GAO: Climate change poses big financial risk to federal government
- Death takes no holiday: Tracking gun violence over one long January weekend
Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
The usual crap is 'if it saves one life....'
With that logic Obama and his drones should be eliminated.
Fantastic idea! Unfortunately, his sheep and zombie followers would freak out with him gone.
They would be shooting people. Because trust me - they have guns too. They know soon they will need them. They just don't know how.
All this new found income! Did officers get a raise? Did the cost of their health care go down? NO! NO!
Did congressmen/senators get a raise and more perks? Yuuuuuuuuuuuup!
Government ought to be looking for the trillions and trillions printed and passed to bankers who bought up stock all thanks to Obama and your socialist utopia resulting in mass poverty and corruption.
Drivers will now have their eyes glued on the traffic light instead of other drivers with cameras watching. That is a distraction that wont improve safety.
Go a step further. They even have signs readable by drivers from all directions which say the intersection is controlled by traffic cameras. Then, people start looking around for the cameras and end up running the red light. It's called a "blonde moment."
A good pellet rifle can be scoped and you an hit a dime at 50 yards. Camera hunt is on!
both parties are corrupt, you are wise man, problem is your not as smart as the camera you are hunting. Think about it, as you shoot the camera it's filming you....
Cameras these days getting better all the time and getting less expensive, so to think cameras won't be apart of our public future is being naive. So how and who can use cameras, I think its like the government wire tapping, its illegal, but private citizens can video all they want in public. The government can't hire private citizens to do their Cameron for them. A vehicle insurance company gives reduced fees for putting an information gatherer in the vehicle, and I could see in the future where cameras come standard in all vehicles. The red light camera ticket system is wrong and illegal. If you let this be law then whats to say they can't use the possible violation to come and inspect your home to make sure your not doing anything illegal there, because it only make sense if your a person who would run a red light then you are possibly a person who may do illegal thing in your home?? who knows just saying this because I hear the word felon being thrown around allot lately, and if your a felon on probation, your home can be enter at will at anytime, no matter whose home it is, so they say. Whats to say being accused of running a red light in the future doesn't become a felony? The light suddenly goes yellow then red, a picture clearly shows you in a vehicle in the intersection, with the light red. Your a felon, I'm not sure what all felons are restricted from, but possessing a firearm is one thing they cannot do, so if you can reduce the amount of firearms in the hands of the public, just by making running a supposedly red light then whats to stop you from making more things felonies. The time fit the crime?? what happened to that old saying, seems to be swept under the bus, for instance a person who has been searched and impossetion of a Oxycontin pill that was not prescribed to them by a authorized prescribee, can be found guilty of a felony and can no longer posses a fire arm and for years can be detained and searched, including the entering of the place he or she lists as residents, at the will of who ever is overseeing the individual. While big business are pumping out drugs for profit, cameras will be clicking away for the same reason, profit. The safety factor is bologna, because the dam vehicle is already past the danger prevention stage when a picture is taken.
wantnot...do you REALLY think people are reading your book? I saw all that and skipped it. I came back to let you know that these are posts, no Blogs.
true that thanks lol
It started as a post, guess I got a bit carried away!!!
In Louisiana we don't have cameras. We have extra long yellows and usually you see 7-8 cars run the yellow and 2-3 more follow when the green is already in the opposite direction. Instead of slowing down and stopping when yellow comes on excelleration is the common practice. Not that the idiots gain anything, they are usually sitting at the next lite when you pull up next to them from the previous traffic violation.
This is just another example of where freedom and privacy are invaded and taken away in the name of money and "safety." It's a red herring. Automatic policing is being done because the cops on the beat aren't doing their jobs. They should be patrolling the streets and issuing tickets for violations. The amount of money these cameras generate is staggering. Appeals are routinely denied. This is just like the HR departments of companies giving our paycheck information over to a private company so they don't have to answer phone calls about employment records. That company then amasses this monster data base down to every last red cent you earn and then the company takes your private information and sells it for a profit. the company comments are predictable and false.
Just another way to fleece Americans. Can one call this "Highway Robbery" ? Illegal aliens won't ever get a ticket because the box they live in isn't registered.
Either you increase the Yellow time, or you increase the Red time, or you have a yellow, followed by a blinking red, then a red. People always think that where they are going and what they are doing is more important than waiting for other people. You cant legislate good behavior, so you set up something that works with human nature, instead of a punishment. Punishment has been shown to produce Resistance...a real no brainer.
The problem with the inept driver is that if it's yellow when their bumper enters the intersection they believe they are in the right. They don't understand that the yellow was there so they could stop before the lite turns red. They still believe that yellow is ok to race through.
I suppose these red light cameras are Obamas fault too?
let us all guess royalpainintheass....you simply cant read anything, without a political thought comming out of your butt.
OOOO, your a tough troll pain in the ass. Go back into your moms basement loser.
Smile you're on candid camera. :)
Why not just stop at red lights, don't speed up on a yellow light to beat the red, and don't tailgate (so you don't rear-end the car in front stopping for the red light)? Then you won't have to worry about a camera.
Doesn't always work out like that, I don't tail gate and I don't run red lights. But if the guy in front of you panic stops because he wasn't paying attention or on the PHONE, you risk hitting them even though you were trying to follow a safe distance and speed. Then there is also a HUGE majority that simply can't drive in this country because where ever they came from apparently DON'T understand Americas driving laws and or understand common courtesy! We have become a ME ME ME society!
bearl, then you were not following at a safe distance, very simple. What happen if they do the same thing because a child came running in the street ? Someone should be able to slam on the brakes without some irresponsible driver rear ending him.
Mumbulu, I agree completely, sadly common sense is a rare thing on the road.
Kissimmee Fl has issues with these camera companies as well. I have spoken to many people and people in the County Road Maintenance which confirmed that our cameras at many lights have shorter yellow light periods. Some seem to have issues that go farther than that, they will jump from green to red almost skipping the yellow with just a blink if an emergency vehicle has approached the intersection. So far I have had no personal issue other than having to stand on my brakes and pray I don't get rear-ended!I think these need to be controlled by the local officials and not private companies. Then the County/City can control the corruption and get 100% of the money collected.
As always where modern government is concerned, its all about the benjamins. If it was about safety, there wouldn't be cameras, there would be barriers that raise to impede traffic moving into the intersection or some other means to actually stop the accidents, rather than a way to guarantee placing blame for accidents and gaining revenue from traffic fines.
Errors need to be corrected, and one of the problems is that the people who administer these things won't look for errors until they're forced to.
That being said, if you don't run red lights, the cameras aren't a problem. Giving the current uncivil attitudes of many drivers, the cameras serve a useful purpose of keeping the morons under control.
Another idiot who didn't read the article. It seems you missed the part about rigging the system and also about the errors in the system. You also seem to have missed the part where the corruption and contract rigging is inviolved.
It is clear that our constitution provides that Government should do what it can do better to promote the public good. These companies should provide a service for a set fee and no incentive for more or less tickets; it is a conflict of interest to pay them per violation. They have an incentive to rig the system against the citizen. I think the taxpayers would rather this be enforced by real police than by pprofit grubbing parasites with no civic consciousness.
Just increase the fines for running a red light to $5000 for the first offense and $5000 and the loss of your vehicle for the second. Station a cop at problem intersections. People will be stopping when the light turns yellow.
You would think stationing an officer or two at these "Problem" intersections would be the thing to do. Unfortunately, officials claim not to have the money they need to do this. How much money would the gain by this? Even in a city of 200,000-300,000 it would be enough to hire spare officers and vehicles to do this.
The cameras are free, and generate revenue. There simply aren't enough police to watch the morons who run red lights 24x7.
I see a lot of complaints about how red light cameras are not "fair" or it is "robbery". It only fits those profiles if you are breaking the law. And the statistic about rear end collisions is pretty fascinating. If you rear end someone, no matter the circumstance, you are following too closely to begin with, aren't you?
What a bunch of crybabies.
Guess you didn't read the article! It seems you failed to notice they are often flawed and also being set up improperly. You probably work for one of these losers.
It is impossible to think of this as well intentioned when the motive is profit and severe corruption has already been identified; imagine, too corrupt for Chicago! At any rate, the average citizen does not want this and we are being ignored so police and city officials can enhance their wallets. If the real issue is safety there are clearly better solutions. Also the issue of correlation does not mean cause; side air bags could account for the drop in fatalities.
If you are one of the money grubbing parasites involved in this I hope your loose your income and job the way way you got it; back door politcs!
The 'application' of red light cameras, can vary from state to state & jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
Last year, I was on a vacation in the state of CO. ( Aurora.)
The town of Aurora has red light cameras installed at many intersections - And the yellow lights at those intersections, are RIDICULOUSLY SHORT.
It is obvious to an outsider, that the town of Aurora is 'rigging' the red light system, to put as many drivers 'in violation' as possible.
The 'rigged' system they have in place there, doesn't seem to work. Folks seem to run the red lights as much as, if not worse, than anywhere else I have been. Maybe they have given up, because they know the system is rigged.
IF the town of Aurora WAS REALLY INTERESTED in enforcing safety - instead of maximizing revenue - they should make the yellow light last 1 or 2 seconds longer. Then, they would see a reduction in both red light violations, AND average speeds.... Because folks would not be trying to speed in order to 'beat the yellow'.
I think that at some point, the town of Aurora, CO., is going to catch the 'wrong person' ( such as a Lawyer ) in one of their yellow light / 'red light ' cameras. Then the city is going to $pend tens of thousands, defending itself from the 'legal ramifications' - and lose their case - because someone armed with the right data, and legal background, can & will prove that their system is 'rigged'.
I'm assuming laws with regards to these cameras are different in many states.. In my state (Arizona), they have to serve you the violation before you are required to pay it and they have to serve you within a 120 days, if they don't they have to drop the ticket.. They also have to deliver it personally, they can't post it on the door, etc.. If they don't the ticket is dismissed... It's 18.00 for the process server to deliver the citation.. If they want me to pay the ticket, they can come find me... If it's not you in the picture they want you to tell them who it is.. I don't think so..
The problem in Yonkers, N.Y. is that the light turns from green to yellow, at the standard speed, then turns red real quickly. The picture is taken as soon as the light turns red. So if your driving through and the light turns from green to yellow, and you think you have time, you don't!! You get a ticket!
Their have been numerous complaints, but the city has done nothing about it.....
THERodney
If ever I get a red-light-camera ticket - I immediately snap a photo of the amount
they require and send them the photograph
Dennis-387683
Of course that has been done and yes it was humorous. The response in that case
was the police sent back a picture of handcuffs at which point the individual
decided the wiser decision was to go pay the fine
I think at that point I would have to take a picture of the poster for "Catch me if you can" and mail it back to them ...
I've personally have seen at least 1 dozen vehicles going through red lights here where I live. It's funny to see myself adjusting vehicle speed and stopping my car at the appropriate time and watching vehicles in the lane next to me that are speeding go right through an intersection without batting an eye. Happens more often than not they are speeding about 5 to 10 mph over the posted speed limits. Just like the multitudes of people with cell phones in their hands either driving way too slow or looking in their laps as they text while they drive. . . another very big danger. . .if there were intersection camera's here a lot of this speeding would stop and people would respect the speed limits that are posted.
Given the amount of cars I see failing to stop at red lights or failing to yield to pedestrians who have the right of way at crosswalks, I have no,problem with cameras provided they are run by a non profit (government) agency, have an appeal mechanism in place (footage), and are situated at lights that are timed properly. Years ago I had a commute with a light on an isolated stretch of highway. The light was timed so poorly it was impossible to stop while going the 55 mph speed limit. You had to speed up to try and avoid the red. Madness! Yet it took years for it to get fixed.
...
The only way to control people is to keep track of them.
Any good government must have this ability.
...
Government is not supposed to control people, It is the people who are supposed to control government
Our Government is "Of the people ,By the people,For the people, Unfortunately we have let our government grow and bloat to a position where Government no longer works for the people and that Government thinks that the people must work for Government. This is wrong and not how our founders wanted government to operate.
I tend to agree that government must control the people, and, since we elect our government it seems that WE, the people control ourselves. All the laws passed have been passed with the consent of the people, well, lol, the majority of the people. The first order of business of a government like ours is to protect and support the interests of the people and if that means keeping us safe from each other, well, so be it. Lol, that also means protection from the reckless and irresponsible drivers.